Civil Enforcement - Letter Before Action

MrP_Arker

Thanks guys, heres the first draft of my defence. Have taken the morning off work to make a start on it....worth every minute of using up a precious sick day! 

The facts as known to the Defendant:

2. It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper of the vehicle and driver.

3.  The defendant contests the fairness and validity of the parking ticket issued on 02/03/2022 at Butterfly Walk car park, and presents the following defence.

• a) On the aforementioned date, the defendant arrived at Butterfly Walk car park at 08:02 am, having consistently utilised this parking facility for the previous six weeks. Throughout this period, the defendant encountered recurrent issues with the functionality of the 'Phone & Pay' app, which frequently failed to respond to their attempts to utilise it effectively.
• b) On the specific day in question, after parking their van, the defendant diligently attempted to activate the app, spending approximately 10 minutes trying to rectify the technical difficulties encountered. Unfortunately, despite their earnest efforts, the app continued to freeze, rendering it incapable of processing the necessary parking payment.
• c) Recognising the need for assistance, the defendant proceeded to the parking attendant booth in search of a resolution. They subsequently spent an approximate further 10 minutes trying to locate a parking attendant or member of staff who could provide the required guidance. After an extended period of persistence, the defendant eventually managed to remit the required parking fee of £11.80 via the 'Phone & Pay' app at 08:37 am. It is worth noting that the confirmation received from the app inaccurately reflects the payment time as 08:47 am, introducing a discrepancy of 10 minutes between the confirmed parking start time by the app and the record of payment's parking start time as maintained by Butterfly Walk, further highlighting the issues with the apps connectivity.
• d) Furthermore, it should be highlighted that no signage was displayed within the car park to inform users of the appropriate course of action in the event of app malfunction. Equally noteworthy is the lack of signage forewarning users of the protracted period of stress and harassment endured over the subsequent 16 months.
• e) Following the issuance of an initial letter, alleging non-payment for the aforementioned parking session and imposing a fine of £60, the defendant promptly initiated an appeal process, seeking to rectify the apparent error. However, the website address provided by the original parking company failed to accept any images or files submitted as evidence, while the telephone number offered for direct communication proved unresponsive. Despite the defendant's genuine efforts to provide evidence of payment, their queries regarding the submission process were disregarded, ultimately resulting in the rejection of their appeal and an escalation of the fine imposed.
• f) Subsequent attempts by the defendant to establish contact were met with ongoing challenges, as the correspondences received originated from various different entities. The difficulty in navigating communication with this multitude of companies became increasingly arduous, with one instance in particular culminating in a distressing encounter where an aggressive male party threatened the defendant over the phone, demanding immediate payment of costs exceeding £100 within a 24-hour timeframe, under the threat of personal visitation to the defendants home address. The cumulative effect of this complex and fragmented process has inflicted considerable anxiety and distress upon the defendant throughout the past 12 months.
• g) In light of the circumstances presented above, the defendant requests a fair and unbiased assessment of the matter at hand, emphasising the need to rectify the erroneous parking ticket and address the unwarranted repercussions and emotional toll inflicted upon them. The defendant seeks a just resolution, reflecting a credible and persuasive examination of the facts presented in this defence. 

4. The facts in this defence come from the...

Let me know what you think, have lots of time to make changes and/or rewrite some/all of it. I've also included the whole template defence from paragraph 4 onwards. 

Also, probably not important, but should I number the paragraphs within point #3 as 4., 5., 6 etc. as oppose to lettering them? Then amend the following paragraphs from #4 accordingly?

MrP_Arker

Coupon-mad said:

Thera's no filling out paperwork. You said you filled out AOS paperwork...that's not what the NEWBIES thread coaches to do.

Sorry just meant I'd filled the AOS paperwork out online, not paper copies. 

1505grandad

Just checking:-

"3.  The defendant contests the fairness and validity of the parking ticket issued on 02/03/2022 at Butterfly Walk ...."

However op states:-

"I wrongly received a parking ticket in a private car park last year 09/03/2022."

B789

Your defence is more like a witness statement which comes much later in the process. Your defence should be a short series of legal “hooks” which you will later hang your WS on.

All you need to state is why you were there, that you paid but were frustrated by technical issues with the app etc.

When you contacted Morrisons, did you just email them or did you use their online customer service portal? Their online portal contains a link specifically for customers that receive PCNs.

https://www.morrisons.com/help/form/contact-us/car-park/car-parking-charges/i-have-a-car-parking-charge

MrP_Arker

1505grandad said:

Just checking:-

"3.  The defendant contests the fairness and validity of the parking ticket issued on 02/03/2022 at Butterfly Walk ...."

However op states:-

"I wrongly received a parking ticket in a private car park last year 09/03/2022."

Thanks, well spotted. The parking ticket correspondence states 02/03/22....think I just got my dates wrong in my original post...so I've gone with their date of the 2nd. 

MrP_Arker

B789 said:

Your defence is more like a witness statement which comes much later in the process. Your defence should be a short series of legal “hooks” which you will later hang your WS on.

All you need to state is why you were there, that you paid but were frustrated by technical issues with the app etc.

When you contacted Morrisons, did you just email them or did you use their online customer service portal? Their online portal contains a link specifically for customers that receive PCNs.

https://www.morrisons.com/help/form/contact-us/car-park/car-parking-charges/i-have-a-car-parking-charge

Thanks.

Yes I used Morrisons online customer service portal but never got a response. I eventually emailed the customer services of the branch responsible and they said this...

'I’m very sorry to say that this car park is owned and operated by a private landlord and not by Morrisons. Due to this we’re unable to assist you with the charge. You’ll be best contacting the Parking Company directly to appeal the charge.'

Super helpful. 

Regarding my defence, Ok great. I can save the majority of it for my witness statement later on. I'll have a go at trimming it and just including the bulk of my defence.

Many thanks for your input 

Coupon-mad

I would not state the parking firm's unproven ANPR timings as if they are true:

"defendant arrived at Butterfly Walk car park at 08:02 am".

Unless you have dash-cam footage you don't know this!  Could have been minutes later.  Be more vague.

MrP_Arker

Coupon-mad said:

I would not state the parking firm's unproven ANPR timings as if they are true:

"defendant arrived at Butterfly Walk car park at 08:02 am".

Unless you have dash-cam footage you don't know this!  Could have been minutes later.  Be more vague.

Ok good point, I'm getting the 8:02am from their photo of me entering the carpark. I'll amend to 'just after 8am'. 

MrP_Arker

So I've had a go at drafting a slightly shorter, more direct defence. Thanks for the advice B786. Worried it may still be a little too long. Am going to collate everything together over the weekend in preparation to send by Monday 4pm.

The facts as known to the Defendant:

2. It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper and driver of the vehicle.

3.  The defendant presents the following defence regarding the unfair parking ticket received on 02/03/2022 at Butterfly Walk car park, highlighting key points to support their case:

1. Purpose of Presence: The defendant was lawfully present at Butterfly Walk car park on the specified date and time.
2. Payment Attempt: The defendant diligently attempted to make the required parking payment through the 'Phone & Pay' app, which had been their consistent method of payment for the preceding 2-3 weeks.
3. Technical Difficulties: Despite the defendant's sincere efforts, they encountered persistent technical issues with the app, including freezing and unresponsiveness, hindering their ability to complete the payment process effectively.
4. Search for Assistance: Recognising the need for guidance, the defendant sought assistance by approaching the parking attendant booth, spending a considerable amount of time in search of help.
5. Inoperative Ticket Machine: The ticket machine at the car park was found to be out of order, exacerbating the defendant's challenges in resolving the payment issue.
6. Successful Payment: After persevering through the technical difficulties and exploring alternatives, the defendant successfully made the payment of £11.80 for their parking session, as had been consistently done in the preceding six weeks.
7. Discrepancy in Payment Time: It is worth noting that the screenshot evidence of payment from the app incorrectly indicates a payment time of 08:47 am, creating a discrepancy of 10 minutes between the app's confirmation and Butterfly Walk's record of payment start time, further highlighting the issues with the apps connectivity.
8. Lack of Appropriate Guidance: No signage was prominently displayed within the car park, indicating the course of action to be followed in the event of app malfunction or addressing the subsequent harassment endured by the defendant.
9. By highlighting these crucial aspects, the defendant asserts that their presence at the car park was legitimate, and they made earnest efforts to fulfil their parking obligations despite facing substantial challenges caused by the app's technical issues. The defendant seeks a fair and impartial evaluation of their case, aiming to rectify the unjust parking ticket and address the undue anxiety and stress inflicted upon them as a result of this prolonged ordeal.

4. The facts in this defence come from the Defendant's own knowledge and honest belief....

Coupon-mad

All good - but your numbering is odd. You can't have 1-9 within other numbered paragraphs.

Also how come there's a 'parking attendant booth' if CEL are using ANPR remotely?

Also DON'T email it this week. You have until Monday and we are hoping for the draft IA from the DLUHC before that.  May as well finalise this at the weekend and see if the DLUHC updates the position in time for you to use their wording a bit!